1080p/60fps is OBJECTIVELY better

#31SomboSteelPosted 2/2/2014 9:06:34 PM
lilj812 posted...
SomboSteel posted...
lilj812 posted...
Considering you paid 500 dollars, 100 dollars more than the competition, shouldn't you always, and I mean ALWAYS get the best?


What, no more trolling about the NSA?


I don't know what you're talking about. I never trolled here regarding nsa


We'll isn't that the biggest lie ever posted on this board....
#32kingofjamaicaPosted 2/2/2014 10:02:56 PM
Why even bring up money? You already made your point. Yes, 1080p60 is objectively better. It offers higher image quality, and more responsive interaction with the game. If anyone argues otherwise, they're dead wrong.
---
At some point, you're going to have to talk to a tree and do what it says. - Arbor Day Rule, Grand List of RPG Cliches.
#33Talon684Posted 2/2/2014 10:39:44 PM
As someone who started gaming back on the Atari, I could care less about 1080p and 60 fps. As long as the game play is fun I could careless about the other stuff. These so called new gamers only seem to care about graphics and nothing else.
---
I was dying of thirst, but now I have been rehydrated by the tears of people like this Cliffy B
#34hotgamerPosted 2/2/2014 10:51:08 PM
scorpio man posted...
Man seriously the $ argument is getting sad, I mean you spent $400 for a console with no games?

So whos really the winner here? 3 million+ sales looks to me like people ware FINE with the system

Also please list and explain in detail to me every single PS4 game with 1080P and CONSTANT 60 FPS vs. the Xbox One


And where are the X1 games exactly. Oh wait, there isn't any either. You just spent 500$ on a huge paperweight too.
---
Trying to contain the chaos is futile.
#35PraetorXynPosted 2/3/2014 12:57:18 AM
DaLagga posted...
lilj812 posted...
Considering you paid 500 dollars, 100 dollars more than the competition, shouldn't you always, and I mean ALWAYS get the best?


The same could be said of the PS3 compared to the x360. Not only did it come out a full year later, but the PS3 was $200 more. Despite all that, it was ultimately no faster than the x360 and arguably slightly slower overall with the vast majority of multi-platform games performing worse on Sony's platform. I guess Sony fans ended up paying a whole hell of a lot more for an objectively worse experience, right TC?


I hope you all realize that's his entire point.

People picked the 360 because it ran multiplats better, so he's curious why the same people picked the console that runs them worse this time.

On another note, resolution and framerate go DOWN as a generation goes on, not up. The graphics get better, but in order to do that with static hardware they sacrifice resolution, framerate, anti-aliasing, reduce draw distance, add fog-like effects to cover up the reduced draw distance, add motion blur and/or blurring filters to cover up jaggies, etc. It's what most people call "optimization."

The alarming thing this generation is how mediocre the performance of both consoles is compared to last generation. When the 360 came out, it was roughly on part with high end PC's of the time, though top of the line still beat it handily. This generation, the PS4 is about on par with mid-range PC's. The troubling fact is that most launch games are also released on 360 and PS3, and the PS4 is still unable to run them at 1080P/60 FPS.

By the end of this generation, the 360 and PS3 were limping along with gamse having framerates in the low 20's dropping to the high-to-mid 10's at well below 720p resolution. I'm afraid it's going to be much worse this time around by the end.
---
Console war in a nutshell:
http://imgur.com/xA6GJZ9.png
#36Laylow12Posted 2/3/2014 1:12:08 AM
Pay more for less quality works for some people.
---
The Queen of Light took her bow, and then she turned to go.
The Prince of Peace embraced the gloom, and walked the night alone.-Battle of Evermore/Zeppelin
#37yay4pachirisuPosted 2/3/2014 1:51:41 AM
sup lilj812
http://i.imgur.com/DmvpUmB.gif
---
http://i.imgur.com/NR1OD.png
#38loafy013Posted 2/3/2014 3:01:18 AM
Neoreloaded313 posted...
I played Assassins Creed (60fps) excessively on my PS4 and then started playing Dead Rising 3(30fps) and I did not notice anything "wrong" with 30fps. If it was not for the internet I would have no idea what these game's fps were.

I have always wondered the same thing. How exactly do people measure fps on a console system? Unless you setting up two televsions (that are the same age, make, and model) side by side with multiple systems, would it even matter to you if it wasn't for reading about certain fps for certain games somewhere.
---
The ball is round, the game lasts 90 minutes. That's fact.
Everything else, is theory.
#39DaLaggaPosted 2/3/2014 3:05:43 AM
PraetorXyn posted...
DaLagga posted...
lilj812 posted...
Considering you paid 500 dollars, 100 dollars more than the competition, shouldn't you always, and I mean ALWAYS get the best?


The same could be said of the PS3 compared to the x360. Not only did it come out a full year later, but the PS3 was $200 more. Despite all that, it was ultimately no faster than the x360 and arguably slightly slower overall with the vast majority of multi-platform games performing worse on Sony's platform. I guess Sony fans ended up paying a whole hell of a lot more for an objectively worse experience, right TC?


I hope you all realize that's his entire point.

People picked the 360 because it ran multiplats better, so he's curious why the same people picked the console that runs them worse this time.

On another note, resolution and framerate go DOWN as a generation goes on, not up. The graphics get better, but in order to do that with static hardware they sacrifice resolution, framerate, anti-aliasing, reduce draw distance, add fog-like effects to cover up the reduced draw distance, add motion blur and/or blurring filters to cover up jaggies, etc. It's what most people call "optimization."

The alarming thing this generation is how mediocre the performance of both consoles is compared to last generation. When the 360 came out, it was roughly on part with high end PC's of the time, though top of the line still beat it handily. This generation, the PS4 is about on par with mid-range PC's. The troubling fact is that most launch games are also released on 360 and PS3, and the PS4 is still unable to run them at 1080P/60 FPS.

By the end of this generation, the 360 and PS3 were limping along with gamse having framerates in the low 20's dropping to the high-to-mid 10's at well below 720p resolution. I'm afraid it's going to be much worse this time around by the end.


Well, I think the x360 was popular at first simply because it had a full year advantage over the PS3 and, unlike the Wii U, represented a generational leap in processing power over the previous generation. But for the most part I agree with everything you just said.

While I very seriously doubt we'll see games that run at lower than 720p, I think the idea that 1080p will be the norm for this generation like how 720p was the norm for the previous generation is a bit unrealistic. As for framerate, I don't think it matters how powerful a console is. The Xbone/PS4 could be running 3 GTX780's in SLI and it would make no difference. Most games this generation are going to run at 30fps because the ultimate nature of developers designing games on fixed hardware is to push graphics as far as they can go and framerate is always sacrificed to achieve this goal.

Although, the fact that something like the PS4 is the weakest that a top performing console has ever been at the time of release in all of gaming history, relative to PC's, certainly doesn't bode well for the next 6 to 8 years that we'll likely be stuck with these outdated clunkers.
#40Ryan-06Posted 2/3/2014 3:05:47 AM
scorpio man posted...
Man seriously the $ argument is getting sad, I mean you spent $400 for a console with no games?

So whos really the winner here? 3 million+ sales looks to me like people ware FINE with the system

Also please list and explain in detail to me every single PS4 game with 1080P and CONSTANT 60 FPS vs. the Xbox One


lol no.

Take your own advice about "sad" arguments: "X, Y, hardware has NO GAEMZ!" Look at a calendar. It's been out for 3 months. The PS3 and 360 have been going on for 8+ years. Think.
---
Power of da Cloud confirmed, see the difference! http://youtu.be/UzuT0uA9snE
http://ow.ly/t0gvj, http://ow.ly/t0g1Y